Minority of undergraduate health science students reported using GenAI for reflective writing, mostly to support rather than replace reflection¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-18 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In a study the review attributes to [43], only 33% of undergraduate health science students reported using GenAI on reflective writing, largely to enhance learning and efficiency rather than replace their own reflection. → Rajan Kadel 2026

Evidence¶

Rajan Kadel 2026¶

Rajan Kadel, Samar Shailendra, Islam Mohammad Tahidul, Urvashi Rahul Saxena, Aakanksha Sharma, and Sabitra Kaphle. (2026). The 5P Reflection Model for Education in the Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Era. Pre-print submitted to IEEE Transactions on Education. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.03413 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.03413

q2 · i? · design · r1

The review reports this survey of undergraduate health science students' self-reported GenAI use, citing [43]: "only a minority(33%)reported using it". The review notes the study relied on anonymous, retrospective self-report data, which may be subject to social desirability bias. No effect size is printed.

"the authors examine undergraduate health science students’ self-reported use of GenAI on reflective writing, finding that only a minority(33%)reported using it, largely to enhance learning and efficiency rather than to replace their own reflection."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Question-driven AI journaling increases intrinsic motivation and acting confidence among actors — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Educators struggled to reliably differentiate student-written from GenAI-generated reflections — related
• GenAI-era assessment reform should move beyond defensive approaches focused primarily on preventing misconduct or detecting AI use — related
• Nursing academics hold divergent attitudes toward GenAI, from scepticism to pragmatic acceptance, and worry it may replace rather than support student learning — related
• Pedagogically scaffolded generative AI in design thinking education augments rather than replaces human judgment — a broader claim this one bears on
• Experimental-group students framed AI as a flexible writing scaffold supporting their own composing rather than a substitute for authorship — a broader claim this one bears on
• Educational HRV research is concentrated on stress and on undergraduate, largely health-science, participants